What has happened to this place??

On Mar 7, 4:43 pm, "Partac" wrote:


I bet he wears his underpants over his trousers.

You don't wear underpants with bibshorts.
Duh - everyone knows that.

--
Simon Mason

On Mar 7, 10:31*am, Simon Mason wrote:
On Mar 7, 7:28*am, Doug wrote:









On Mar 6, 4:51*am, Simon Mason wrote:

On Mar 5, 11:23*pm, M Wicks wrote:

I used to lurk here quite a lot, but not for many years. Today I
decided to see what uk.rec.cycling was like these days, and frankly I
am shocked at what has become of the group. Why are there so many
arguments? Why does every thread degenerate into mudslinging?

I am afraid the good old days of urc are largely in the past.
Like in a lot of internet fora, it has become a haven for trolls, some
really sick ones as well who will laugh at dead cyclists and decend
into cyber stalking and foul personal abuse.
I am sure you remember Guy Chapman - he was subject to the most foul
and vicious abuse imaginable, plus he got crank phone calls and home
visits off one troll who also published all of his personal details
here.

My "job" is to purge urc of troll activity by depriving them of what
they most crave - attention.
If the trolls post excessively then so do I to remove their influence..

And the posts you read by the likes of "Mr Benn", "J Nugent", "The
Medway Handyman", "Mr Cheerful" and "Judith" are not meant to
stimulate healthy debate, but are solely designed to stir up trouble,
anti cycling rhetoric, provoke outrage when they mock dead cyclists
and then decend into hateful personal attacks. And all because we
enjoy cycling.

If you wish to discuss cycling in a troll free environment then there
is now uk.rec.cycling.moderated.

Take care and thanks for your input.

I would just like to add that another reason is that URC has become
much more infested by motorists, some of whom cross-post from motoring
newsgroups, and who seem to have a 'down' on cyclists in general.

Doug.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Don't forget that I am a driver as well, Doug.
We don't all have a downer on cyclists.

Yes but you are aware of the problems posed by motorists and are
seriously trying to minimise your car use, unlike many others here.

Doug.

On Mar 7, 3:55*pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 07/03/2012 07:28, Doug wrote:

I would just like to add that another reason is that URC has become
much more infested by motorists, some of whom cross-post from motoring
newsgroups, and who seem to have a 'down' on cyclists in general.

Doug.

Attracted here by a certain ****wit cross posing car hater ****e.

It's thatnks to Doug that I'm here.

Say thank you to Doug.

That's odd, I came to URC in the first place because of motorists like
you cross-posting here.

-- .
A driving licence is sometimes a licence to kill.

On Mar 7, 5:51*pm, JNugent wrote:
On 07/03/2012 09:29, NorthWalesYorkie wrote:

On Mar 5, 11:23 pm, M *wrote:
I used to lurk here quite a lot, but not for many years. Today I
decided to see what uk.rec.cycling was like these days, and frankly I
am shocked at what has become of the group. Why are there so many
arguments? Why does every thread degenerate into mudslinging?
You only have to read the "Motorist donates carton of milk to cyclist"
thread to learn that this group is the playground for a deeply
unpleasant bunch of creatures.

What is "unpleasant" about a few harmless puns (of a sort seen again and
again on usenet - at least, wherever people with a sense of humour gather)?

Are you so po-faced that you think cycling and cyclists must only be treated
with the utmost respect and always utterly seriously?

If you ever have the misfortune to be assaulted, then I trust you will
find it equally hilarious.

On 08/03/2012 04:56, wrote:
On Mar 7, 4:43 pm, wrote:


I bet he wears his underpants over his trousers.

You don't wear underpants with bibshorts.
Duh - everyone knows that.

--
Simon Mason

Far too much information....

Probably explains why cyclists fire blanks though.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On Mar 8, 7:05*am, Doug wrote:
On Mar 7, 10:31*am, Simon Mason wrote:



On Mar 7, 7:28*am, Doug wrote:

On Mar 6, 4:51*am, Simon Mason wrote:

On Mar 5, 11:23*pm, M Wicks wrote:

I used to lurk here quite a lot, but not for many years. Today I
decided to see what uk.rec.cycling was like these days, and frankly I
am shocked at what has become of the group. Why are there so many
arguments? Why does every thread degenerate into mudslinging?

I am afraid the good old days of urc are largely in the past.
Like in a lot of internet fora, it has become a haven for trolls, some
really sick ones as well who will laugh at dead cyclists and decend
into cyber stalking and foul personal abuse.
I am sure you remember Guy Chapman - he was subject to the most foul
and vicious abuse imaginable, plus he got crank phone calls and home
visits off one troll who also published all of his personal details
here.

My "job" is to purge urc of troll activity by depriving them of what
they most crave - attention.
If the trolls post excessively then so do I to remove their influence.

And the posts you read by the likes of "Mr Benn", "J Nugent", "The
Medway Handyman", "Mr Cheerful" and "Judith" are not meant to
stimulate healthy debate, but are solely designed to stir up trouble,
anti cycling rhetoric, provoke outrage when they mock dead cyclists
and then decend into hateful personal attacks. And all because we
enjoy cycling.

If you wish to discuss cycling in a troll free environment then there
is now uk.rec.cycling.moderated.

Take care and thanks for your input.

I would just like to add that another reason is that URC has become
much more infested by motorists, some of whom cross-post from motoring
newsgroups, and who seem to have a 'down' on cyclists in general.

Doug.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Don't forget that I am a driver as well, Doug.
We don't all have a downer on cyclists.

Yes but you are aware of the problems posed by motorists and are
seriously trying to minimise your car use, unlike many others here.

Doug.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well - when our lass loses her weight and we no longer have to go on
long hilly walks, both she and I will be cycling to work, so our car
use will plummet accordingly.

--
Simon Mason

On 08/03/2012 08:59, NorthWalesYorkie wrote:
On Mar 7, 5:51 pm, wrote:
On 07/03/2012 09:29, NorthWalesYorkie wrote:

On Mar 5, 11:23 pm, M wrote:
I used to lurk here quite a lot, but not for many years. Today I
decided to see what uk.rec.cycling was like these days, and frankly I
am shocked at what has become of the group. Why are there so many
arguments? Why does every thread degenerate into mudslinging?
You only have to read the "Motorist donates carton of milk to cyclist"
thread to learn that this group is the playground for a deeply
unpleasant bunch of creatures.

What is "unpleasant" about a few harmless puns (of a sort seen again and
again on usenet - at least, wherever people with a sense of humour gather)?

Are you so po-faced that you think cycling and cyclists must only be treated
with the utmost respect and always utterly seriously?

If you ever have the misfortune to be assaulted, then I trust you will
find it equally hilarious.

Is making a pun the same as assaulting someone on your planet?

On Mar 7, 6:16*pm, Tony Dragon wrote:

Don't forget that I am a driver as well, Doug.
We don't all have a downer on cyclists.



And indeed only one 'cyclist' seems to have a downer on all motorists.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do riders of electric bikes count as pure cyclists though?
One was even banned from driving for after being nabbed drunk in
charge of one the other day.
They can't do that if you are on a bike.

--
Simon Mason

On Mar 8, 9:06*am, Simon Mason wrote:
On Mar 8, 7:05*am, Doug wrote:









On Mar 7, 10:31*am, Simon Mason wrote:

On Mar 7, 7:28*am, Doug wrote:

On Mar 6, 4:51*am, Simon Mason wrote:

On Mar 5, 11:23*pm, M Wicks wrote:

I used to lurk here quite a lot, but not for many years. Today I
decided to see what uk.rec.cycling was like these days, and frankly I
am shocked at what has become of the group. Why are there so many
arguments? Why does every thread degenerate into mudslinging?

I am afraid the good old days of urc are largely in the past.
Like in a lot of internet fora, it has become a haven for trolls, some
really sick ones as well who will laugh at dead cyclists and decend
into cyber stalking and foul personal abuse.
I am sure you remember Guy Chapman - he was subject to the most foul
and vicious abuse imaginable, plus he got crank phone calls and home
visits off one troll who also published all of his personal details
here.

My "job" is to purge urc of troll activity by depriving them of what
they most crave - attention.
If the trolls post excessively then so do I to remove their influence.

And the posts you read by the likes of "Mr Benn", "J Nugent", "The
Medway Handyman", "Mr Cheerful" and "Judith" are not meant to
stimulate healthy debate, but are solely designed to stir up trouble,
anti cycling rhetoric, provoke outrage when they mock dead cyclists
and then decend into hateful personal attacks. And all because we
enjoy cycling.

If you wish to discuss cycling in a troll free environment then there
is now uk.rec.cycling.moderated.

Take care and thanks for your input.

I would just like to add that another reason is that URC has become
much more infested by motorists, some of whom cross-post from motoring
newsgroups, and who seem to have a 'down' on cyclists in general.

Doug.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Don't forget that I am a driver as well, Doug.
We don't all have a downer on cyclists.

Yes but you are aware of the problems posed by motorists and are
seriously trying to minimise your car use, unlike many others here.

Doug.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well - when our lass loses her weight and we no longer have to go on
long hilly walks, both she and I will be cycling to work, so our car
use will plummet accordingly.

Excellent! Beware though, being fat is mainly caused by food intake
and you have to do a heck of a lot of exercise to combat it. Only if
you mildly overeat will exercise be of any use, apart form the fact
that it makes you generally healthier.

"Riding at a moderate speed (12 – 14 mph) you will burn approximately
235 calories per half hour."

So assume someone is overeating to the extent of 1000 calories per day
they will have to cycle approx 2 hours or, say, 26 miles every day to
combat it and that is seven days per week. Much easier and simpler to
just cut down on the eating and then exercise a little for general
health's sake

Doug.

On Mar 9, 4:30*am, Simon Mason wrote:
On Mar 7, 6:16*pm, Tony Dragon wrote:



Don't forget that I am a driver as well, Doug.
We don't all have a downer on cyclists.

And indeed only one 'cyclist' seems to have a downer on all motorists.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do riders of electric bikes count as pure cyclists though?
One was even banned from driving for after being nabbed drunk in
charge of one the other day.
They can't do that if you are on a bike.

Personally I wouldn't consider an electric bike as counting as pure
cycling but as more of a disability aid. Do you have a source link for
that ban?

Doug.